Beethoven - "Appassionata", 3rd mvt. - Enzo

[emill]

This was played by Enzo during his recital last January 2013.

He would like to ask your opinion regarding 2 broad topics.
1. Is the character of the piece reasonably brought out?
    He says he is not sure whether he was able to do so.  He is not satisfied.

    hhhmmmnn ....  seems okay with me !!   

2. Is the phrasing alright? acceptable?
    He says that he  modified certain parts of the piece or
    interpreted some parts differently as suggested in the piece.

THANKS for any answer and of course other comments and observations are so welcome.  

[pianoman53]

My main problem is that Enzo treats the right hand figure as an accompaniment - as soon as there is some sort of thematic material in lf, the rh is gone. This makes the piece very fragmented and one dimensional.
And I don't think he plays very legato, which is a problem. The tone is just not there, and it sounds rather thin.
Maybe the tempo can be a bit more consequent as well, on places it goes down, and gets very heavy.

For me, it's in general too out going. The fortes are, for me, more "inner" than actual fortes. Feel the forte, without playing that loud. It's difficult to explain, but it makes a lot of difference.


I hope it made sense.

[dima_76557]

THANKS for any answer and of course other comments and observations are so welcome.

I am not qualified to give any critics of Enzo's playing. I would like to add the following:

Part of Enzo's not being satisfied about his own performance is certainly that instrument in that hall. I have played on several Shigeru Kawai's, and they generally project quite differently from, say, a Steinway. You simply need time to adjust, get to know the abilities of that instrument, and he may not have had that time frame. When you read comments, critical remarks about volume and tone, please keep that in mind. When Enzo rehearses, he should take someone with him with the right ears to evaluate how a certain instrument works from a distance in a certain hall, especially since the Classics are a lot harder to project than the Romantics. Way to go, Enzo!

[quantum]

I would like to congratulate Enzo for this very musical performance and his well reasoned interpretation.  The tone was never bangy, and there was much clarity in Beethoven's idiomatic dynamic surges.  IMO the character of this piece was very well brought out in this interpretation.  Other people want to hear a virtuosic orgy when they hear this piece and claim anything less is unacceptable, I am not one of those people.  I prefer to hear the message, and the particular quality each performer brings to the music.  In that regard, Enzo has done an excellent job of communicating this music. 

IMO, his phrasing is very musical and well thought out.  Nothing stood out as being against the spirit of the music.  His phrasing brought a very lyrical character to the music, something I appreciated.

There are some parts where the 16th note figure tends to disappear, as pianoman53 pointed out.  IMO, some of these were quite enjoyable, and other places felt like the music was getting a bit too thin.  Bar 112-117 for example, it may work better to treat this as one line rather than having a drastic dynamic contrast when the LH comes in at Bar 115.  I see what Enzo was intending here, maybe just work with the balance a bit more. 

[awesom_o]

Overall the character was not tempestuous enough for me.  

In general he follows dynamic markings quite accurately. There are some quiet places in my score that I heard pretty loudly in Enzo's rendition. For instance, the sfz at m. 215 and 217 are within the dynamic level of pp. I think this section would sound more effective if he observed that-we would get more contrast with all of the ff stuff that came moments before.

There were also a few too many moments where the hands sounded noticeably out of sync.
The passage beginning at m. 64, and its analagous equivalents later on, does not make rhythmic sense to my ears. It sounds to me like he distorts the rhythm and plays the first 16th notes, or rests, too long, likely because he cannot execute the jump in the LH at full speed yet.

I find in general his 16th notes throughout the piece sound a bit too lightweight and insubstantial for this piece. Even the 16th notes need to have a core to the sound that makes Beethoven come alive!

Even when the 16th notes are marked pp, they need to carry a quiet intensity that I currently do not hear. Not a dynamic quality but an indescribable quality of portamento touch that is required to render this repertoire at the highest level.

[awesom_o]

Overall the character was not tempestuous  enough for me. 

In general he follows dynamic markings quite accurately. There are some quiet places in my score that I heard pretty loudly in Enzo's rendition. For instance, the sfz at m. 215 and 217 are within the dynamic level of pp. I think this section would sound more effective if he observed that-we would get more contrast with all of the ff stuff that came moments before.

There were also a few too many moments where the hands sounded noticeably out of sync.
The passage beginning at m. 64, and its analagous equivalents later on, does not make rhythmic sense to my ears. It sounds to me like he distorts the rhythm and plays the first 16th notes, or rests, too long, likely because he cannot execute the jump in the LH at full speed yet.

I find in general his 16th notes throughout the piece sound a bit too lightweight and insubstantial for this piece. Even the 16th notes need to have a core to the sound that makes Beethoven come alive!

Even when the 16th notes are marked pp, they need to carry a quiet intensity that I currently do not hear. Not a dynamic quality but an indescribable quality of portamento touch that is required to render this repertoire at the highest level.

[joebee]

Very expressive indeed.  Played with ease.   How long did it take you  to momorize the movement?   

[joebee]

Enzo,
9 different pianists will give 9 different views about your performance.  I think you should stick to your interpretation.    Just make sure you can defend your interpretation.    I think you should have confidence in your amazing ability to make the movement look so easy to play.  If someone suggest a different interpretation ask them why and if they succeed in convincing you, you could change to their interpretation.   I think the beauty of individuality is that two pianist plays a piece with all the notes but interpret it differently.  I think life is more like that, than playing it in the exact interpretation of someone else.  Be confident about your interpretation and defend it with conviction.   Stop doubting yourself now.  And if you are helping someone at a lower level teach them to believe in their interpretation don't  let them feel they have to interpret it like you do.    I prefer if a critic  says "I don't agree with your interpretation"  than " Your interpretation is wrong".   Don't let anyone "disempower"   you neither should you "disempower"    anyone .   Enough said.    Joebee 

[emill]

Thank you for the responses!!
It never fails to generate a good amount of discussion between him and his teacher
and I know he has been trying out the last 2 days some of the suggestions made here. He has his
definite ideas about how things should be but is very open to what he feels are "valid points" raised. That is why he asks certain pieces to be posted to get the feel of peers.

My wish is that he will get "out of his shell" a bit more every day and engage those who
raised observations.  He has always been introspective and silent in terms of verbalizing his thoughts and feelings about the piano except to his teacher.  But as some here have commented in the past .. in due time he will surely become more open.  I hope that when he starts at the Eastman School of Music this fall for his piano performance and being exposed to a more liberal, open and opinion expressive society he will finally learn the beauty of engaging and discussing one's thoughts. 
   

Enzo,
9 different pianists will give 9 different views about your performance.  I think you should stick to your interpretation.    Just make sure you can defend your interpretation.    I think you should have confidence in your amazing ability to make the movement look so easy to play.  If someone suggest a different interpretation ask them why and if they succeed in convincing you, you could change to their interpretation.   I think the beauty of individuality is that two pianist plays a piece with all the notes but interpret it differently.  I think life is more like that, than playing it in the exact interpretation of someone else.  Be confident about your interpretation and defend it with conviction.   Stop doubting yourself now.  And if you are helping someone at a lower level teach them to believe in their interpretation don't  let them feel they have to interpret it like you do.    I prefer if a critic  says "I don't agree with your interpretation"  than " Your interpretation is wrong".   Don't let anyone "disempower"   you neither should you "disempower"    anyone .   Enough said.    Joebee 

Very well said!!!  Personally I feel that he is quite confident about his skills and his level of understanding BUT he is his own No. 1 critic ... almost never attaining a level of satisfaction in most pieces he tackles.... always "experimenting" with this and that approach.  Sometimes his teacher tells him to "archive" a piece temporarily to give him and her  a temporary respite.
He is used to receiving positive and negative observations and takes them well.  It is clear to me that whatever judgement he forms, he is satisfied with it.  I am sure and I see it that as the years pass he is becoming his OWN.   THANKS.....
 

[ajspiano]

Just make sure you can defend your interpretation.  If someone suggest a different interpretation ask them why and if they succeed in convincing you, you could change to their interpretation. 

Well said indeed. We must be sure that we have considered every aspect of our interpretation and made a choice about it. Then the feedback becomes a way to explore new approaches that we may not have considered ourselves, as opposed to in the beginning where feedback often exists just to ensure that we think about an aspect at all.

I must say I carried a small snippet out of the bolet masterclasses with me and I find it very useful in ensure I keep my mind focused. He's helping the student develop an interpretation in the latter section of the cadenza in mov 1 of the rach 3, he doesn't say what to do - instead he asks "What is the importance of this note?". Which as it turns out is a multi dimensional thing, its not just this one more than that one, because with the particular note it question they define the importance as being dissonance to another. So not only is it about one note, but it is how the note (or line) may fit into the overall context, and how that defines its importance.

And i think also, for someones feedback/advice to be properly valid, they must have considered the aspect of the piece in this way - and if they have, they should have no trouble answering the "why should I do it that way?" question. If they can't you are following a personal whim, or relayed information that the person may not actually understand themselves.

[johnmar78]

CongraduALTIONS ENzo!

TECHNICAL IMPRESSION 9/10; Artistic impression 9/10. Overall impression 9/10. Mate, if I can play like that, its a talent.

The recording quality was good, with 2X close mics in grand?

[pianoman53]

Enzo,
9 different pianists will give 9 different views about your performance.  I think you should stick to your interpretation.    Just make sure you can defend your interpretation.    I think you should have confidence in your amazing ability to make the movement look so easy to play.  If someone suggest a different interpretation ask them why and if they succeed in convincing you, you could change to their interpretation.   I think the beauty of individuality is that two pianist plays a piece with all the notes but interpret it differently.  I think life is more like that, than playing it in the exact interpretation of someone else.  Be confident about your interpretation and defend it with conviction.   Stop doubting yourself now.  And if you are helping someone at a lower level teach them to believe in their interpretation don't  let them feel they have to interpret it like you do.    I prefer if a critic  says "I don't agree with your interpretation"  than " Your interpretation is wrong".   Don't let anyone "disempower"   you neither should you "disempower"    anyone .   Enough said.    Joebee 

I actually don't agree.
First of all, everyone who commented are not educated pianists which makes comments very uneven. Not that I don't appreciate all members here, but you can't take critique from uneducated in the same way as critique from educated.
Secondly, we who pointed out critique all pointed out more or less the same thing. Most of which weren't simply interpretive suggestions.

[joebee]

I actually don't agree.
First of all, everyone who commented are not educated pianists which makes comments very uneven. Not that I don't appreciate all members here, but you can't take critique from uneducated in the same way as critique from educated.
Secondly, we who pointed out critique all pointed out more or less the same thing. Most of which weren't simply interpretive suggestions.

Points taken.  Thanks .  Joebee